Does Defense Win Championships?

The Lakers decision to sign Mike D’Antoni was questioned by a few. Was it a way to spite the Zen Master for trying to play hardball? Was it to get Steve Nash out of his funk? Regardless of the answer, it would appear that the Lakers have decided to go against the wisdom that defense wins championships. Even when he was leading 55+ win teams in Phoenix, his teams were not known for defense (and the stats back this up)

For fun, here’s a rundown of D’Antoni’s teams offensive and defensive ratings (points earned per 100 possessions and points given up per 100 possessions)

Season

Team

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

1999

Denver

103.1 (12th)

110.4 (29th)

2004

Phoenix

101.4 (21st)

105.5 (24th)

2005

Phoenix

114.5 (1st)

107.1 (17th)

2006

Phoenix

111.5 (2nd)

105.8 (16th)

2007

Phoenix

113.9 (1st)

106.4 (13th)

2008

Phoenix

113.3 (2nd)

108.1 (16th)

2009

New York

108.1 (17th)

110.8 (23rd)

2010

New York

107.6 (17th)

111.6 (27th)

2011

New York

110.9 (7th)

110.1 (22nd)

2012*

New York

104.4 (17th)

101.0 (5th)

In his entire career the only season D’Antoni ever saw a team with a good defense is the year he was fired. I’ll toe the line saying that he never had a fully defensive squad. The Laker team he inherited was 13th in Defensive Rating last season and is currently 18th in the league. Of course, as New York showed with Tyson Chandler, one player can make the difference. Dwight Howard, as we’ll see, has anchored some top defenses. It’s possible D’Antoni’s history of poor defenses may end this season.

Let’s ask the question though, if the Lakers don’t have a good defense, do they stand a shot at a title? Let’s take a look at teams that made it to the finals over the last several decades. Numbers from Basketball-Reference

2010′s Title Rundowns

Season

Champ

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

Runner Up

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

2012

Miami

106.6 (8th)

100.2 (4th)

Oklahoma City

109.8 (2nd)

103.2 (11th)

2011

Dallas

109.7 (8th)

105.0 (8th)

Miami

111.7 (3rd)

103.5 (5th)

2010

Los Angeles

108.8 (11th)

103.7 (4th)

Boston

107.7 (15th)

103.8 (5th)

2000′s Title Rundowns

Season

Champ

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

Runner Up

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

2009

Los Angeles

112.8 (3rd)

104.7 (6th)

Orlando

109.2 (11th)

101.9 (1st)

2008

Boston

110.2 (10th)

98.9 (1st)

Los Angeles

113.0 (3rd)

105.5 (5th)

2007

San Antonio

109.2 (5th)

99.9 (2nd)

Cleveland

105.5 (18th)

101.3 (4th)

2006

Miami

108.7 (7th)

104.5 (9th)

Dallas

111.8 (1st)

105.0 (11th)

2005

San Antonio

107.5 (8th)

98.8 (1st)

Detroit

105.6 (17th)

101.2 (3rd)

2004

Detroit

102.0 (18th)

95.4 (2nd)

Los Angeles

105.5 (6th)

101.3 (8th)

2003

San Antonio

105.6 (7th)

99.7 (3rd)

New Jersey

103.8 (18th)

98.1 (1st)

2002

Los Angeles

109.4 (2nd)

92.1 (6th)

New Jersey

104.0 (17th)

99.5 (1st)

2001

Los Angeles

108.4 (2nd)

104.8 (21st)

Philadelphia

103.6 (13th)

98.9 (5th)

2000

Los Angeles

107.3 (5th)

98.2 (1st)

Indiana

108.5 (1st)

103.6 (13th)

1990′s Title Rundowns

Season

Champ

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

Runner Up

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

1999

San Antonio

104.0 (11th)

95.0 (1st)

New York

98.6 (26th)

97,5 (4th)

1998

Chicago

107.7 (9th)

99.8 (3rd)

Utah Jazz

112.7 (1st)

105.4 (17th)

1997

Chicago

114.4 (1st)

102.4 (4th)

Utah Jazz

113.6 (2nd)

104.0 (9th)

1996

Chicago

115.2 (1st)

101.8 (1st)

Seattle

110.3 (8th)

102.1 (2nd)

1995

Houston

109.7 (7th)

107.4 (12th)

Orlando

115.1 (1st)

107.8 (13th)

1994

Houston

105.9 (15th)

101.4 (2nd)

New York

105.7 (16th)

98.2 (1st)

1993

Chicago

112.9 (2nd)

106.1 (7th)

Phoenix

113.3 (1st)

106.7 (9th)

1992

Chicago

115.5 (1st)

104.5 (4th)

Portland

111.4 (7th)

104.2 (3rd)

1991

Chicago

114.6 (1st)

105.2 (7th)

Los Angeles

112.1 (5th)

105.0 (5th)

1990

Detroit

109.9 (11th)

103.5 (2nd)

Portland

110.5 (9th)

104.4 (4th)

1980′s Title Rundowns

Season

Champ

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

Runner Up

ORating (Rank)

DRating (Rank)

1989

Detroit

110.8 (7th)

104.7 (3rd)

Los Angeles

113.8 (1st)

106.7 (7th)

1988

Los Angeles

113.1 (2nd)

107.3 (9th)

Detroit

110.5 (6th)

105.3 (2nd)

1987

Los Angeles

115.6 (1st)

106.5 (7th)

Boston

113.5 (3rd)

106.8 (9th)

1986

Boston

111.8 (3rd)

102.6 (1st)

Houston

110.1 (5th)

107.6 (14th)

1985

Los Angeles

114.1 (1st)

107.0 (7th)

Boston

112.8 (2nd)

106.3 (5th)

1984

Boston

110.9 (6th)

104.4 (3rd)

Los Angeles

110.9 (5th)

107.3 (9th)

1983

Philadelphia

108.3 (5th)

100.9 (5th)

Los Angeles

110.5 (1st)

105.2 (13th)

1982

Los Angeles

110.2 (2nd)

105.5 (10th)

Philadelphia

109.6 (5th)

103.9 (7th)

1981

Boston Celtics

108.4 (5th)

102.6 (4th)

Houston

107.0 (9th)

106.7 (16th)

1980

Los Angeles

109.5 (1st)

103.9 (9th)

Philadelphia

105.0 (13th)

101.0 (1st)

The prognosis is a bit interesting. Of our champions 20 out of 33 of them had a top five defense. In fact, all but two had a top ten defense (the 1995 Houston Rockets and the 2001 Los Angeles Lakers) We’re a little more forgiving to runner ups, 18 out of 33 of them had a top five defense, while 25 out of 33 had a top 10 defense. The full explanation is a bit more simple though.

The key to winning in the NBA is point differential. In fact, that’s the basis Wins Produced is based on. If we look at how many points our team score on offense vs. how many they give up on defense, we get a good estimate of how good of a team we have. To win the title requires being a good team. As such, a team needs to be good at offense, defense or both.

And in fact, that’s what we see. 26 out of our 33 title teams were top 10 in both defense AND offense (with the 1996 Chicago Bulls amazingly being number one in both) It’s a bit further down for runner-ups. Only 15 out of 33 were top 10 in both offense in defense. However, across all of our teams, every single one of them was top 10 in either offense or defense. (Which is how teams like the 2004 Pistons and 2001 Lakers still won despite being poor at offense and defense respectively)

Right now the Lakers are, in fact, 6th in the league in offense. They have a bona fied star and their record is actually worse than their stats suggest. It’s possible if the Lakers behind Dwight Howard rebound then D’Antoni could finally win a title and have a top defense. Or, if they somehow imitate the 2001 season, they might even do it with a terrible defense. That said, I’d still have sided with Phil Jackson

19 Responses to "Does Defense Win Championships?"

Something which I think gets mostly overlooked is the benefits a good defense can have on a teams offense and vice versa. For example, a team which forces misses and turnovers will generally get easier opportunities to score than if they are inbounding the ball from made baskets by the other team. I imagine it would be very difficult to measure exactly how much effect a teams defense has on it’s offense but I think it’s something to consider when you look at teams only winning championships if they are good at both. I don’t think it’s just because they are good at both offense and defense in isolation, I think there is a relationship between the two that is perhaps underestimated.

I don’t think you can just look at PPG surrendered to evaluate the D. I think you have to look at points per possession. For instance, in 2008 the Suns were 25th in points surrendered, and 30th in FGA allowed. You would have to look at Points / FGA + FTA*.44 – Opponents O Reb

GS,
It’s an interesting question to be sure. In fact, I looked just at title teams, it would be interesting to check both ways (does a good defense imply a good offense and the inverse) Some of the logic makes sense. If my defense is good and I get the ball before the opponent is set, I should have an easier time scoring (unless I’m the Grizzlies, see Arturo’s great work http://wagesofwins.com/2012/11/12/breaking-down-the-2012-nba-offenses-looking-for-floor-stretch/) and if my offense is good then the ball goes in the hoop, I can set my D and the opponent doesn’t get easy buckets (fast breaks, etc.)

IMO, the issue with D’Antoni and defense is generally misunderstood. You’ve addressed the biggest misunderstanding by using defensive efficiency instead of PPG allowed to measure those good Suns teams.

The other is the players he wants on his team.

It’s pretty darn rare to find a player that plays both offense and defense at a very high level. Most excel at one and you hope they are adequate at the other.

Some coaches focus on players that excel on defense and build truly superior defensive teams that struggle to score (chicago). Some focus on offense and get the opposite result. (some are more balanced)

Given a choice between 2 players with equal overall value, D’Antoni will almost always choose the better offensive player. It’s not that he can’t coach defense. It’s that his teams are loaded with offense oriented players that fit well together. He’s never had a two way guy like Howard in the middle protecting Nash. He had Amare (a first class matador). In NY he had David Lee (who is also a poor defender and very undersized). If Metta and Kobe can still stay with all the young guns, the defense in LA will be fine. If not, it won’t be D’Antoni’s fault.

Stat,
Can’t say I disagree (although possible Kobe and Metta slip a bit on D due to age) the Knicks had a good D and D’Antoni was there for most of the season. Will Fields and Chandler it was arguably first season he had defensive pieces. And like I mentioned, he ended up getting fired. Maybe the powers that be in basketball can’t allow D’Antoni to have a top 5 D :)

I’ve always liked D’Antoni as a coach, but my regard for him took a hard hit last season with the Knicks. His complete inability to recognize that JLin was better than Tony Douglas and Mike Bibby until finally his hand was forced by JLin’s triple double in a D-league game and impending contract deadline, is frankly, in excusable. Maybe that can be explained by the fact that Lin gives you decent boards and great steals from the guard position, and so projects to be a “defensive” player. But what explains not playing Novak? These were serious misses in the most important part of a coaches job requirement, minutes allocation.
At least the Lakers have lots of big names and it should be easy enough to figure out who to play.

Todd,
The Suns were great by outscoring their opponents, which is how to win. It’s also arguable if this isn’t a successful strategy. They made three Western Conference Finals, and I argue without Amare being ejected they could have made it to four. The way Offensive and Defensive rating are calculated (per 100 possessions) they are adjusted for pace.

Steve, I don’t know if that question is sarcastic. Assuming it wasn’t, yes, I think D’Antoni played the wrong guys. I think it is quite clear that Lin should have played over Bibby and Tony Douglas. It also is quite clear that Lin can play in the NBA. I don’t know why that wasn’t clear in practice. But he was very very close to being released. If he hadn’t dropped a triple double in that D-league game, they might have released him without ever giving him any meaningful court time.

The Conference FInals run in ’06 shoudn’t really be considered an accomplishment. The NBA seedings, at the time, had the two best teams in the West(record wise) playing in the conference semis that year. If the seedings were setup the way they are now, it would have been Spurs/Mavs in the Conference Finals instead of Suns/Mavs. People seem to overlook this fact while heaping praise on those Suns teams.

[...] Sunnergren: Despite the 1-0 lead Hollinger’s boys have spotted the Spurs, I’ll take Memphis in 7. While the Spurs were a considerably better team in the regular season–don’t be fooled by the narrow 58-56 win advantage San Antonio enjoys, the Spurs outscored opponents by 6.4 ppg in 2012-13 while the Grizz boasted a more modest 4.1 ppg margin–Memphis looked flat ferocious in their dispatching of the Westbrook-less Thunder. It swayed me. Also: Memphis is a tremendous defensive team, and superlative defense is more predictive of postseason success than similarly top-shelf offense. (I can’t find a link to back this up at the moment, but it’s a thing.) Ed. Note: I don’t buy that. [...]